home
Rudy Giuliani Claims Credit for Trump's Muslim Ban | 106 comments (106 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Anecdotal evidence also suggests that ... (none / 0) (#11)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 11:33:51 AM EST
... Mexican nationals with valid visas are being detained at two airports at least, LAX and Chicago-O'Hare.

And amid all the Sturm und Drang over this weekend's immigration order, let's please not lose sight of the fact that the Trump administration's National Security Advisor, among several other past and present Trump advisors (Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone), is under active federal investigation over his purported ties to the Russian government.

Further, per the Moscow Times, Sergei Mikhailov, a senior cybersecurity specialist in Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB), was arrested on January 25 for allegedly leaking information to the U.S. intelligence community about Vladimir Fomenko and his server rental company "King Servers," which the American cybersecurity company ThreatConnect identified last September as "an information nexus" that was used by hackers suspected of working for Russian state security in cyberattacks.

Mikhailov and Ruslan Stoyanov, the head of cyber-crime investigations at Russia's Kaspersky Labs who allegedly acted as go-between for Mikhailov and others, have been detained by the FSB and are reportedly likely to face charges of treason in a Moscow courtroom.

If these bombshell allegations are true, it would mean that the CIA likely had an asset in place within the senior echelons of Russia's national defense infrastructure, whose identity was compromised sometime after Trump's election on November 8.

Stay tuned also to these stories, as well the burgeoning story on the chaos caused by Trump's detention order. I've a sneaking suspicion that the order was issued in part to distract the public's attention from these other developments.

Aloha.

it is astounding to me (none / 0) (#14)
by BackFromOhio on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:03:02 PM EST
that everyone is in a flap about the the Exec order to the point of ignoring what Trump did with the NSC.  A slap in the face to the Joint Chiefs, and, perhaps illegal. I have read elsewhere that the position to which Bannon was appointed  requires someone at the Secretary or Undersecretary or advice and consent of the Senate.  So why aren't the Dems up in arms about this?  

Parent
The Democrats are in fact up in arms. (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:38:03 PM EST
It's the media that's whiffing here, because the executive order is the shiny object in the room. But Trump's attempted tilt of the NSC protocols by marginalizing the respective roles of the Director of National Intelligence and Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while adding White House Policy Advisor Steve Bannon, is drawing considerable public attention, as well it should.

I mean, let's stop and consider this moment. Bannon, a mean-spirited jackwagon who first rose to public prominence by trafficking in baseless right-wing rumor and innuendo, is now on the NSC because his good friend Trump put him there.

Bannon's qualifications for the post are nil. What he brings to the table is animus, bigotry, misinformation and perhaps a person desire to facilitate the coming of Armageddon. I fear we are rapidly approaching a critical moment in our nation's journey where a potential political cataclysm is a very real possibility. How we confront and handle it will dictate our country's course, likely for the remainder of our lifetimes.

And that should alarm anyone with a brain and common sense.

Parent

But but but (none / 0) (#24)
by Chuck0 on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:29:20 PM EST
He was a Naval officer! (So was Ensign Parker.)

Parent
What a coincidence. (5.00 / 2) (#27)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:45:08 PM EST
So was Capt. Philip Francis Queeg. LOL!

Parent
Oh, it's being (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:19:02 PM EST
reported on too not lost in the shuffle about the Muslim ban. The thing with Bannon is more of a call your reps type thing though. I can call mine again but I'm pretty much represented by people who are are more afraid of Neo Nazis than the other 2/3 of the country.

Parent
Actually (none / 0) (#15)
by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:28:58 PM EST
people have been speaking out and CNN to their credit have been reporting it.

Unfortunately there is only so much outrage that can be spread around and in any case the public probably does not give a flying fig about the NSC, however they can relate to people stuck in Kafkaesque airport hell.

That being said, Bannon scares the hell out me and his power is growing stronger.

Parent

As was Axelrod (1.00 / 2) (#16)
by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:37:46 PM EST


Parent
That comparison is both noxious and dumb. (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:43:55 PM EST
Steve Bannon has long trafficked in racism, anti-Semitism, neo-Nazism and white nationalism, and is an unbridled far-right crackpot. While David Axelrod is not one of my favorite people, he's certainly done none of those things.

Parent
Axelrod sat in (1.00 / 3) (#20)
by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:50:57 PM EST
the meetings all the time.
No different than Bannon being there,
Well, except for the transparency, this Administration is letting everyone know Bannon will be sitting in.
Axelrod just sort of showed up, with no notification to the press

Parent
That is a falsehood (5.00 / 4) (#21)
by vicndabx on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:04:05 PM EST
For a so-called non Trump supporter you sure have all the talking points down.

I did not speak or participate. I sat on the sidelines as a silent observer with Gibbs because we would be called upon to publicly discuss the president's decision on that critical matter and the process by which he arrived at it.


Parent
Heh. Axelrod is an "alternative fact." (5.00 / 4) (#22)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:09:25 PM EST
;-D

Parent
Axlerod (5.00 / 3) (#23)
by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:15:09 PM EST
was not a principal, plenty of aides and other functionaries sit in with little fanfare. Axlerod did not displace the DNI or the CJCS.

Parent
Military.Com (1.00 / 2) (#25)
by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:35:55 PM EST
http://tinyurl.com/h8n9u6q

Much ado about nothing

Parent

Ah yes the backtrack (5.00 / 4) (#26)
by vicndabx on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:44:07 PM EST
you keep telling us that

much ado about nothing

sorry, we don't believe you. You keep calm and carry on though.

Parent

Oh, the White House (5.00 / 2) (#36)
by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:22:04 PM EST
who lies about every little thing even unimportant things like crowd sizes denies it. You're such a Trump apologist. Is Putin paying you?

Parent
I would add (none / 0) (#29)
by vicndabx on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:52:38 PM EST
it's not surprising military would make statements indicating they don't expect to be sidelined out of a key role they play. Further, active military would not publicly second guess their commander in chief, which is why you heard from a former secretary and other security chiefs.

Don't downplay things you would've been all up in arms about previously Mr. Email.

Parent

No (none / 0) (#30)
by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:57:09 PM EST
Actually, everyone goes running around like chicken little, and then everything settles down when all the facts are known

Parent
No (none / 0) (#35)
by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:21:30 PM EST
it's fkng insane right from the get go. Why should Bannon, a purely political operator with zero relevant experience sit on the council? There is absolutely no logical reason to do so.

What facts are yet to be known? The whole premise of this move is ignorant and dangerous at best, terrifyingly nefarious at worst.

We know the facts Trevor, it is you running around trying to defend the insane actions of the man you don't support.

Parent

This is seriously FUNNY (5.00 / 4) (#33)
by Yman on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:09:23 PM EST
the meetings all the time.
No different than Bannon being there.

Yeap - "no different" at all.  Well, except for the fact that all Axelrod did was observe the meetings to gain an understanding of the issues.  He didn't speak and was not a participant,  Oh, ... and the fact that he never even attended an NSC Principal's Committee meeting, let alone be named a member of the committee.

But other than that, ... yeah.  "No different".

Heh.

FACT CHECK: Spin Aside, Trump's National Security Council Has A Very Big Change

Parent

This is just stupid Trevor (5.00 / 3) (#64)
by Militarytracy on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:56:44 PM EST
The difference between being a principal and sitting in are night and day. My spouse attends meetings where he is not a principal. You know what that means? Sit down, shut up. You are only there to be informed. You do not speak unless spoken to and asked to speak. My JCs aren't principals? They can sit there and shut up! Holy Phuck!!#! $@$!#! $

Parent
Agreed. (none / 0) (#73)
by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 03:15:04 AM EST
As senior legislative policy analyst for the Speaker of the State House, I sat in on numerous meetings with the governor and his / her staff, as well as House majority caucuses. My role was the same as your husband's, to listen and observe. I did not speak unless I was asked a question directly by one of the principals, or if my boss asked me to further explain a certain bill in more specific detail.

We would have discussions afterward with my boss, obviously, where he allowed us to freely share our opinions about what we saw and heard. But as staff, we knew that we were not part of the decision making process. We had to respect our place accordingly, and further remember that whatever was said by the principals behind closed doors was expected to stay there.

Aloha.

Parent

I'm reading many of my friends (none / 0) (#80)
by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 07:56:56 AM EST
Afraid now of the military being used against them. This "break" serves to "break" the military away from the President. I'm glad, count me glad. The mil will all focus on Mattis and to a lesser degree Kelley. He can always fire  Mattis and Kelley, but he loses the soul of the troops.

I hope he doesn't ever go there, but he's Donald Trump. He will probably go there at some point. Posse Commitatis has loopholes my spouse has long pointed out.

Parent

Rudy Giuliani Claims Credit for Trump's Muslim Ban | 106 comments (106 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft